● https://www.britannica.

com/event/Bosnian-conflict
C-
1. Yes, there has been updates to it.
2. Nope
R-
1. Talks about many specific things about the Bosnia conflict such as the background of
the genocide, the independence and war, as well as the war crimes and trials.
2. Possibly yes due to which it contains many information and section of the genocide.
3. There may be more better sources that go into more of the genocide experience.
A-
1. None seem to to afflicted with it.
2. I believe so.
3. They seem to not have a bias it seems, but if they may be biased I could possibly use
that to see the many perspectives of the genocide.
A-
1. Doesn’t seem so there a three section, each providing with many information.
2. No, just seems to provide as is what happened with the Bosnian genocide.
3. It is not a study.
4. Yes as well as pictures too.
5. I don’t believe so.
P-
1. To explain it seems.
2. Possibly to tell about the main events that happened during the Bosnian genocide.
3. I believe so.
4. It somewhat has one, showing the war crimes that some people commited that were in
the Bosnian genocide

● https://www.mtholyoke.edu/~bonne20s/causes.html
R-
1. The website seem to be very much credible, the information provided comes from a
college.
2. Doesn’t seem to have any event that may have affected the information given.
3. Doesn’t seem so, but they are a college.
A-
1. Yes, it does seem so after looking a the sources.
2. Although the author seems to not have put down his or her name in the article, the
author does not show that he had experience the Bosnian conflict.
V-
1. No, doesn’t seem so.
2. No, all he could have done was lie about information and that’s pretty much it.
3. Yes, by allowing people to see from a true perspective and get information of the
Bosnian genocide.
E-
1. Yes, he has used some information from many other credible sources it seems.
 2. Yes, it seems that some if not most of the sources the author used was from a source at
least talking about Bosnia or the Bosnian genocide.
N-
1. The author does not seem to be biased.
2. The sources could have been biased due to which they specialized with Bosnia or the
Bosnian genocide.

● http://worldwithoutgenocide.org/genocides-and-conflicts/bosnia

P-
1. It seems to be explaining about the Bosnian genocide, specifically talking about the who,
whats, and whys of the Bosnian genocide.
2. It seems to be biased since after all, it is a website showing that genocide should be
stopped or should end.
3. Although there is no author, they do provide contacts to talk and discuss with the
website.
A-
1. Does not have an author.
2. They since to be qualified under the genocide section, providing information and such.
3. They have written about many other genocides that has happen throughout the world.
4. There is no author, but the website does offer a email address.
5. It seems to be going more into the specifics and explain about many things rather than
inform me.
A-
1. Seems so, provides many number and facts as well as being specialized in genocides.
2. Doesn’t seem to show any changes or an area to see what they have changed.
3. Possibly yes, by referring some facts to credible sources.
4. No it does not.
5. Just to be mostly facts and explanations.
C-
1. Seems to be last updated in 2017.
2. Does not say, but does seem up-to-date.
3. No website links or sources are provided.
4. Yes in some cases, where they provided some information coming from 2017.
5. Yes it is.
D-
1. Yes, it does also look neat too.
2. Yes it is organized and neat, providing sections.
3. It does seem so.
4. No, they have sections onto the right side that can lead you to other genocide and
scrolling to the top can lead to other sections of the website.
5. Yes it is easy to search the site.
6. Doesn’t seem to have a help screen?
 ● https://www.nytimes.com/1995/10/29/world/massacre-in-bosnia-srebrenica-the-days-of-
slaughter.html

R-
1. It is a very well known sources that is acknowledged by many people
2. They can sometimes provide credible sources most of the times, but may have some
nonsense in some cases due to some editors.
3. Does not seem so, but they are a known news company, so they could alter information
that will spread onto other people.
A-
1. Possibly yes, by providing some information on NATO and such.
2. Possibly yes they could have witnessed it due to the time it happened and when this
article was made (1995), but it does not seem so.
V-
1. Doesn’t seem so
2. Doesn’t seem so, just only to provide fake news.
3. Yes, by providing credible information.
E-
1. Possible yes, from the government organization.
2. Yes, it comes from a source that seems to be specialized in genocides.
N-
1. Seems to be neutral.
2. The sources may be neutral.

● http://www.historyplace.com/worldhistory/genocide/bosnia.htm

C-
1. Doesn’t seem to provide a history as to what has changed.
2. It does not seem to be the case.
R-
1. Mostly about the history of the genocide.
2. Does not seem to be creating an argument.
3. Possibly yes, if I were to go look around the internet some more.
A-
1. It doesn’t provide an author or is an authority.
2. Does not seems so.
3. Possibly yes, since it seems to talk about just the history really.
A-
1. It could have been, after seeing small paragraphs per.
2. It is not a study.
3. Yes, at the bottom, they provided some sources.
4. Doesn’t seem to be conflicted with any other of the sources I’ve chosen.
P-
1. To explain the event
 2. Planning to use it as another way to explain the history of the genocide.
3. It does fit with the rest of my sources it seems.
4. Seems to be, since it is showing the history of the Bosnian genocide.

● http://endgenocide.org/learn/past-genocides/the-bosnian-war-and-srebrenica-genocide/

C-
1. Doesn’t have a history to see if information has been refuted.
2. Doesn’t seem to recent it seems.
R-
1. It talks about the history of the Bosnian genocide such as the ethnic cleansing and etc,
but possibly at a biased perspective
2. It seems to try to make an argument out of the genocide, where it can support that we
should stop genocide.
3. Possibly yes, maybe from a unbiased source so I can see many perspectives of the
genocide.
A-
1. I don’t see an author, but the website itself may not be an authority to the Bosnian
genocide.
2. It is not a scholarly source.
3. Somewhat yes I can trust the person who made this article, but may have to hold back
since it could possibly be a really biased article.
A-
1. It seems to be a bit short, it includes at the end about we should stop genocide as a
whole, setting aside the Bosnian genocide and the information that come with it.
2. It is not a study.
3. They do not cite their sources, but may have included it alongside the information in the
article.
4. It doesn't seem so, the other sources would support this article possibly.
P-
1. It seems to be explaining or arguing about the Bosnian genocide.
2. It could be used as a way to begin the topic of the Bosnian genocide, but I’ll hold it off for
now.
3. It does fit with the sources I have chosen.
4. Possibly it does not since it seems to show it from a biased perspective.

Purposeful
C- Currency 1. Has the information since been refuted?
2. Is it too recent?

R – Relevance 1. What does it have to do with your particular topic?

2. If creating an argument, is it useful as a support or as something for your
 counterargument?
3. Can you find better information for your purposes?

A – Authority 1. Is the person who wrote the article an authority on that topic?
2. Is it a scholarly source?
3. Can you trust the person who wrote the article to remain bias-free, or are you
willing to acknowledge their bias in your writing?

A – Accuracy 1. Is the information in the article overgeneralized?

2. Did the author take the information and make sweeping statements without
support?
3. If the article is a study, check if they acknowledge their limitations.
4. Do they cite their sources?
5. Are you using another source that contradicts it?

P – Purpose 1. What was the intent of the article? (explore, explain, etc.)
2. What are you planning to use it as?
3. Does it fit with the rest of your sources?
4. Do your sources look at the topic from a variety of perspectives?

Citation of the Source:

Print

R – Reputation 1. What is the reputation of the author, sources, publication?

2. Do past actions indicate they are reliable?
3. Are they in a position of authority?
 A – Ability to 1. Is the author in a position that allows access to reliable evidence?
Observe 2. If the article is about an event, did the author actually observe the
event?

V – Vested Interest 1. Does the author have a personal stake in the topic or event?
2. Would the author gain anything by lying?
3. Would the author gain anything by telling the truth?

E – Expertise 1. Does the author have specialized knowledge on the topic or event?
2. Does the evidence come from a source that has expertise on the topic
or event?

N – Neutrality 1. Is the author neutral about the issue or is bias evident?

2. Is the source of the evidence neutral or biased?
Citation of the Source:

Online Sources
 P – Purpose 1. Why was the page created? Is it meant to inform, explain, persuade,
entertain, advertise, or advocate?
2. Is the web site balanced and objective, or biased and opinionated?
3. Does the website have any means of contacting the author or
webmaster?

A – Authority 1 .Does this site have an author?

2. What are the author’s/group’s qualifications or expertise in the area?
3. What else has the author written or produced?
4. Does the author provide an email address?
5. What authorship clues does the url provide?

A – Accuracy 1. Is the information accurate?

2. Has the information been edited?
3. Is the information verifiable?
4. Does the site document the sources used?
5. How does the information compare to what you already know?

C – Currency 1. Is the site up-to-date?

2. When was the information created or last updated?
3. Are the links expired or current?
4. Is the currency important to the type of information available on the
website?
5. Is it well maintained?

D – Design, 1. Does the page look professionally designed?

Organization, Ease 2. Is the page organized and focused?
of Use 3. Is the text well written?
4. Is the page difficult to navigate?
5. Is it easy to search the site?
6. Are help screens available?
Citation of the Source: